DOCSLIB.ORG

1 the Earth in the Solar System 1

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
1 the Earth in the Solar System 1 CHAPTER - 1 THE EARTH IN THE SOLAR SYSTEM 1. Answer the following questions briefly. (a) How does a planet differ from a star? (b) What is meant by the ‘Solar System’? (c) Name all the planets according to their distance from the sun. (d) Why is the Earth called a unique planet? (e) Why do we see only one side of the moon always? (f) What is the Universe? Answer: (a)Differences between a planet and a star: (b) The term Solar System refers to the “family” of the Sun. The Sun is a star around which eight planets, among other celestial objects, revolve in orbits. This whole system of bodies is called the Solar System. The Sun is the “head” of this system. (c) The list of planets in the order of their distance from the Sun is as follows: (i) Mercury ‘ (ii) Venus (iii) Earth (iv) Mars (v) Jupiter (vi) Saturn (vii) Uranus (viii) Neptune (d) The Earth is regarded as a unique planet because of the following reasons: (i) It is the only planet known to support life. It has oxygen and water present in proportions that allow life to thrive. (ii) It also has a temperature range that supports life. (iii) The proportion of water present is about two-thirds of the surface of earth when compared to land. (e) One revolution of the moon around the earth takes about 27 days. Incidentally, the moon’s rotation about its own axis also takes nearly the same time. One day of the moon is equal to 27 Earth days. So only one side of the moon can be seen from the earth. (f) The Universe is the largest unit in which we live. It is a collection of galaxies. There is only one Universe, and everything that exists, exists in this Universe itself. 2. Tick the correct answer. (a) The planet known as the “Earth’s Twin” is (i) Jupiter (ii) Saturn (iii) Venus. (b) Which is the third nearest planet to the sun? (i) Venus (ii) Earth (iii) Mercury. (c) All the planets move around the sun in a (i) Circular path (ii) Rectangular path (iii) Elongated path (d) The Pole Star indicates the direction to the (i) South (ii) North (iii) East. (e) Asteroids are found between the orbits of (i) Saturn and Jupiter (ii) Mars and Jupiter (iii) The Earth and Mars. Answer: (a)—(iii), (b)—(ii), (c)—(iii), (d)—(ii), (e)—(ii). 3. Fill’in the blanks. (a) A group of…….. forming various patterns is called a (b) A huge system of stars is called…………… (c)………… is the closest celestial body to our earth. (d)………. is the third nearest planet to the sun. (e) Planets do not have their own………… and………. Answer:(a) stars, constellation (b) galaxy (c) The moon (d) The earth (e) heat, light. I.Multiple Choice Questions Choose the correct option to complete the statements given below: (i) Full moon night occurs once every………. (a) day (b) 15 days (c) 20 days (d) month. (ii) The Hindi word for the New Moon night is ………. (a) Amavasya (b) Krishna Paksha (c) Poomima (d) none of these. (iii) The sun is ………… (a) a star (b) a celestial body (c) the head of the solar system (d) all of these. (iv) Ursa Major is a/an (a) star(b) constellation(b) galaxy(d) asteroid. (v) Which of these wasa planet till 2006 but is now a “dwarf planet”? (a) Neptune(b) The Sun(c) Pluto(d) Solaris. (vi) The term “Blue Planet” indicates presence of (a) land (b) water (c) oxygen (d) all of these. Answer: (i)—(d), (ii)—(a), (iii)-(d), (iv)-(b), (v)-(c), (vi)-(b). II.Fill in the Blanks Fill in the blanks with appropriate words to complete each sentence: (i) The Amavasya night occurs about ……….. days after the Poomima night. (ii) Stars are celestial bodies that are ……….. and …………. (iii) The planets do not possess their own ……….. and ………… (iv) The Small Bear constellation is better known as the …………. (v) The Greek word which is the origin of the word “planets” means …………. (vi) Three planets having rings around them are ………… , ………. and ………… (vii) …….. are elongated fixed paths in which a celestial body always remains. (viii) Venus is similar to the earth in its ………. and …………. (ix) The shadows on the moon’s surface are due to ……….. , ……… and ………… (x) Meteoroids heat up and bum due to ………… Answer: (i) fifteen (ii)big, hot, (iii) heat, light, (iv)Saptarishi, (v) wanderers, (vi)Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus(vii) Orbits ,(viii)size, shape,(ix) mountains, plains, depressions, (x)friction. III.True/False State whether these sentences are true (T) or false (F). (i) The Sun appears bigger and brighter than the other stars because it is indeed so. (ii) Saptarishi and Ursa Major are two different constellations. (iii) The Pole Star is known to have a fixed position in the sky. (iv) The earth is the only planet that has a natural satellite. (v) Pluto was declared a “dwarf planet” in August 2006. (vi) The earth is the third-largest planet in the solar system. (vii) The geoid shape is not perfectly spherical. (viii) The moon takes about the same time in rotating about its axis once as it does to complete a revolution around the earth. Answer: (i) False, (ii) False, (iii) True, (iv) False, (v) True, (vi) False, (vii) True, (viii) True. V.Very Short Answer Type Questions 1. Name two celestial bodies visible only in the night sky. Answer: The moon and the stars are celestial bodies visible in the night sky. 2. Why do we not feel the heat and light of the stars, even though they are so big and hot? Answer: We do not feel the heat and light of the stars since they are very far away. 3. From which Greek word is the word ‘planet’ derived? Answer: The word ‘planet’ is derived from the Greek word ‘Planetai’. 4. What does the solar family consist of? [V. Imp.] Answer: The solar family consists of the sun, planets, their satellites, and asteroids and meteoroids. 5. What is the shape of the orbits in which planets revolve around the sun? Answer: The orbits of planets are elliptical (Le. elongated) in shape. 6. Which planet is called “Earth’s twin” and why? Answer: Venus is called “Earth’s twin” because it is similar to Earth in its shape and size. 7. What is “Geoid”? Answer: A sphere with its ends flattened at poles (just like earth) is called geoid. 8. Why is earth called “blue planet”? [V. Imp.] Answer: Earth appears blue from when seen from the outer space, since it has over 2/3rd water. So it is called blue planet. 9. How much time does the moon take to revolve once around the earth? Answer: The moon takes approximately 27 days to revolve once around the earth. 10. What is the difference between the moon and INSAT? [V. Imp.] Answer: The moon is a natural satellite of the earth while INSAT is an artificial satellite. 11. What are asteroids? Answer: Asteroids are the numerous tiny celestial bodies which revolve around the sun and are mainly found between the orbits of Mars and Jupiter. 12. What is a meteoroid? Answer: Small pieces of rocks which move around the sun are called meteoroids. VI. Short Answer Type Questions 1. Name the two extreme shapes of the moon. When and at what intervals do they occur? Answer: The moon is seen in its two extreme shapes on the Full Moon night arid the New Moon night. The Full Moon. The Full Moon means the moon in its full circular shape. The New Moon. The New Moon means the moon that can not be seer.The New Moon occurs on the fifteenth day and the Full Moon occurs on the last day of the Hindi calendar month. 2. What is the Pole Star? How can the Saptarishi be used to locate it? [Imp.] Answer: The Pole Star is the star that is known to retain its position in the sky always. We can locate the position of the Pole Star with the help of the constellation Saptarishi. If an imaginary line is drawn joining the “pointer stars” of the Saptarishi and extended further, it will point to the Pole Star. In the Fig. 1.3 shown here, 1 and 2 represent the “pointer stars”. The Pole Star and the pointer stars lie on the same line. 3. Write a short note on the two planets nearest to the sun. Answer: Mercury. It is the nearest planet to the sun. It takes just about 88 earth days to revolve once around the sun. It is extremely hot since it is close to the sun. It is also the smallest planet.Venus. It is the second closest planet to the sun. It is similar to earth in shape and size. It is called “Earth’s twin”. 4. How does earth support life? [V. Imp.] Answer: The earth has conditions that support life. It is neither too hot nor too cold. It has both water and air, which are both indispensable for life. Presence of oxygen in the air in appropriate proportion supports life. These factors make earth a unique planet. VII. Long Answer Type Questions 1. Write short notes on the following: (a) The sun (b) The moon (c) Galaxy. [V. Imp.] Answer: (a) The sun is considered the “head” of the solar system. It is a star, although it is smaller and less bright than most other stars. It is a huge celestial body made up of extremely hot gases.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Links to Education Standards • Introduction to Exoplanets • Glossary of Terms • Classroom Activities Table of Contents Photo © Michael Malyszko Photo © Michael
    an Educator’s Guid E INSIDE • Links to Education Standards • Introduction to Exoplanets • Glossary of Terms • Classroom Activities Table of Contents Photo © Michael Malyszko Photo © Michael For The TeaCher About This Guide .............................................................................................................................................. 4 Connections to Education Standards ................................................................................................... 5 Show Synopsis .................................................................................................................................................. 6 Meet the “Stars” of the Show .................................................................................................................... 8 Introduction to Exoplanets: The Basics .................................................................................................. 9 Delving Deeper: Teaching with the Show ................................................................................................13 Glossary of Terms ..........................................................................................................................................24 Online Learning Tools ..................................................................................................................................26 Exoplanets in the News ..............................................................................................................................27 During
    [Show full text]
  • Binary Asteroids and the Formation of Doublet Craters
    ICARUS 124, 372±391 (1996) ARTICLE NO. 0215 Binary Asteroids and the Formation of Doublet Craters WILLIAM F. BOTTKE,JR. Division of Geological and Planetary Sciences, California Institute of Technology, Mail Code 170-25, Pasadena, California 91125 E-mail: [email protected] AND H. JAY MELOSH Lunar and Planetary Laboratory, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona 85721 Received April 29, 1996; revised August 14, 1996 found we could duplicate the observed fraction of doublet cra- At least 10% (3 out of 28) of the largest known impact craters ters found on Earth, Venus, and Mars. Our results suggest on Earth and a similar fraction of all impact structures on that any search for asteroid satellites should place emphasis Venus are doublets (i.e., have a companion crater nearby), on km-sized Earth-crossing asteroids with short-rotation formed by the nearly simultaneous impact of objects of compa- periods. 1996 Academic Press, Inc. rable size. Mars also has doublet craters, though the fraction found there is smaller (2%). These craters are too large and too far separated to have been formed by the tidal disruption 1. INTRODUCTION of an asteroid prior to impact, or from asteroid fragments dispersed by aerodynamic forces during entry. We propose that Two commonly held paradigms about asteroids and some fast rotating rubble-pile asteroids (e.g., 4769 Castalia), comets are that (a) they are composed of non-fragmented after experiencing a close approach with a planet, undergo tidal chunks of rock or rock/ice mixtures, and (b) they are soli- breakup and split into multiple co-orbiting fragments.
    [Show full text]
  • Humanity and Space
    10/17/2012!! !!!!!! Project Number: MH-1207 Humanity and Space An Interactive Qualifying Project Submitted to WORCESTER POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE In partial fulfillment for the Degree of Bachelor of Science by: Matthew Beck Jillian Chalke Matthew Chase Julia Rugo Professor Mayer H. Humi, Project Advisor Abstract Our IQP investigates the possible functionality of another celestial body as an alternate home for mankind. This project explores the necessary technological advances for moving forward into the future of space travel and human development on the Moon and Mars. Mars is the optimal candidate for future human colonization and a stepping stone towards humanity’s expansion into outer space. Our group concluded space travel and interplanetary exploration is possible, however international political cooperation and stability is necessary for such accomplishments. 2 Executive Summary This report provides insight into extraterrestrial exploration and colonization with regards to technology and human biology. Multiple locations have been taken into consideration for potential development, with such qualifying specifications as resources, atmospheric conditions, hazards, and the environment. Methods of analysis include essential research through online media and library resources, an interview with NASA about the upcoming Curiosity mission to Mars, and the assessment of data through mathematical equations. Our findings concerning the human aspect of space exploration state that humanity is not yet ready politically and will not be able to biologically withstand the hazards of long-term space travel. Additionally, in the field of robotics, we have the necessary hardware to implement adequate operational systems yet humanity lacks the software to implement rudimentary Artificial Intelligence. Findings regarding the physics behind rocketry and space navigation have revealed that the science of spacecraft is well-established.
    [Show full text]
  • The Terrestrial Planet V Hypothesis As the Mechanism for the Origin of the Late Heavy Bombardment
    A&A 535, A41 (2011) Astronomy DOI: 10.1051/0004-6361/201117336 & c ESO 2011 Astrophysics The terrestrial Planet V hypothesis as the mechanism for the origin of the late heavy bombardment R. Brasser and A. Morbidelli Dep. Cassiopée, University of Nice–Sophia Antipolis, CNRS, Observatoire de la Côte d’Azur, 06304 Nice, France e-mail: [email protected] Received 24 May 2011 / Accepted 13 September 2011 ABSTRACT In this study we attempt to model, with numerical simulations, the scenario for the origin of the late heavy bombardment (LHB) proposed in Chambers (2007, Icarus, 189, 386). Chambers suggested that the orbit of a fictitious sub-Mars sized embryo outside Mars became unstable and crossed a part of the asteroid belt until it was removed through ejection or collision. Chambers demonstrated that this kind of evolution can occur at the LHB time, but he did not check whether enough material could be liberated from the belt to be consistent with the magnitude of the LHB. We do that here. In addition to the asteroid belt, we also consider putative belts of small objects located between the orbits of the Earth and Venus (EV belt) or between the Earth and Mars (EM belt). We find that delivering enough material to the Moon from the asteroid belt requires at least a 5 lunar mass embryo crossing the entire asteroid belt up to 3.3 AU for longer than 300 Myr on a low-inclination orbit. We do not witness this to occur in over a hundred simulations. An alternative approach, which relies only on decimating the inner belt (<2.5 AU), requires that the inner belt originally contained 4 to 13 times more mass than the original outer belt.
    [Show full text]
  • The Birth and Evolution of Planetary Systems
    CHAPTER 7 The Birth and Evolution of Planetary Systems hn hk io il sy SY hn hk io il sy SY hn hk io il sy SY Ideas about the origins of the Sun, the Moon, and Earth objects in the Solar System. It is important for the stu- hn hk io il sy SY are older than written history. Greek and Roman mythol- dents to realize that you can determine many of the prop- ogy, as well as creation myths of the Bible, represent some erties of a planet by knowing its mass, size, and distance hn hk io il sy SY of humanity’s earliest attempts to explain how the heav- from the Sun. hn hk io il sy SY ens and Earth were created. Thousands of years and Although planetary scientists are confident they have hn hk io il sy SY the scientific revolution have ultimately debunked many the big picture of Solar System formation correct, the ancient creation stories, but our new theories of solar sys- details are still in question. Questions remain concerning hn hk io il sy SY tem formation are still relatively in their infancy. Jupiter’s formation. It might not have been able to form hn hk io il sy SY The nebular model of solar system formation was first via accretion but may have formed similarly to the Sun. proposed by Immanuel Kant in 1755. It has undergone To complicate matters further, Uranus and Neptune significant revision in the last 250 years, but the details of appear to be too large to have formed at their current posi- the pro cess remain elusive.
    [Show full text]
  • Late Heavy Bombardment
    Late Heavy Bombardment The Late Heavy Bombardment (abbreviated LHB and also known as the lunar cataclysm) is an event thought to have occurred approximately 4.1 to 3.8 billion years (Ga) ago,[1] at a time corresponding to the Neohadean and Eoarchean eras on Earth. During this interval, a disproportionately large number of asteroids are theorized to have collided with the early terrestrial planets in the inner Solar System, including Mercury, Venus, Earth, and Mars.[2] The Late Heavy Bombardment happened after the Earth and other rocky planets had formed and accreted most of their mass, but still quite early in Earth's history. Evidence for the LHB derives from lunar samples brought back by the Apollo astronauts. Isotopic dating of Moon rocks implies that most impact melts occurred in a rather narrow interval of time. Several hypotheses attempt to explain the apparent spike in the flux of impactors (i.e. asteroids and comets) in the inner Solar System, but no consensus yet exists. The Nice model, popular among planetary scientists, postulates that the giant planets underwent orbital Artist's impression of the Moon during the Late Heavy Bombardment (above) migration and in doing so, scattered objects in the asteroid and/or Kuiper belts and today (below). into eccentric orbits, and into the path of the terrestrial planets. Other researchers argue that the lunar sample data do not require a ataclysmicc cratering event near 3.9 Ga, and that the apparent clustering of impact-melt ages near this time is an artifact of sampling materials retrieved
    [Show full text]
  • SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION Doi:10.1038/Nature10201
    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION doi:10.1038/nature10201 1 Outline Here we provide more details on the simulations and on the dependence of the results on the parameters of the problem. We discuss, in sequence, the following points: • Section 2: Simulation methods, for reproducibility of the results. This includes: (i) adopted gas profile, (ii) formulæ for gas-drag and tidal damping calculations and (iii) implementation of giant planet migration. • Section 3: Defining a plausible evolution scenario for the giant planets. • Section 4: Relevance of different aspects of giant planet evolution for sculpting the inner solar system. • Section 5: Dependence of the results on the initial location of Jupiter and different migra- tion timescales. • Section 6: Dependence of the results on the size of the planetesimals. • Section 7: Implications for the Asteroid Belt. • Section 8: Placing this result in context. These issues underline the robustness of our results, but also its parametric dependencies. Our present paper should be considered as a conceptual demonstration that the inward- then-outward migration of Jupiter with a tack at 1.5 AU can explain properties of the inner WWW.NATURE.COM/NATURE | 1 doi:10.1038/nature10201 RESEARCH SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION solar system that were unsolved problems until now. We did not attempt any quantitative fine- tuning of our results, but limited ourselves to showing qualitative agreements and appropriate efficiencies. The parametric dependencies of the results illustrated in Sections 5 & 6, however, should be useful guidelines for future work, aimed at a better quantitative reconstruction of the asteroid belt structure. Section 7 provides a discussion on the possible implications this work has related to the origin of the asteroid belt, and notes recent related research.
    [Show full text]
  • The Energy Transfer Process in Planetary Flybys
    The energy transfer process in planetary flybys John D. Anderson, a,∗,1 James K. Campbell a Michael Martin Nieto b aJet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA 91109, U.S.A. bTheoretical Division (MS-B285), Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, New Mexico 87545, U.S.A. Abstract We illustrate the energy transfer during planetary flybys as a function of time using a number of flight mission examples. The energy transfer process is rather more complicated than a monotonic increase (or decrease) of energy with time. It exhibits temporary maxima and minima with time which then partially moderate before the asymptotic condition is obtained. The energy transfer to angular momentum is exhibited by an approximate Jacobi constant for the system. We demonstrate this with flybys that have shown unexplained behaviors: i) the possible onset of the “Pioneer anomaly” with the gravity assist of Pioneer 11 by Saturn to hyperbolic orbit (as well as the Pioneer 10 hyperbolic gravity assist by Jupiter) and ii) the Earth flyby anomalies of small increases in energy in the geocentric system (Galileo- I, NEAR, and Rosetta, in addition discussing the Cassini and Messenger flybys). arXiv:astro-ph/0608087v2 2 Nov 2006 Perhaps some small, as yet unrecognized effect in the energy-transfer process can shed light on these anomalies. Key words: planetary gravity assist, dynamical anomaly PACS: 95.10.Eg, 95.55.Pe, 96.12.De ∗ Corresponding author. Email addresses: [email protected] (John D. Anderson,), [email protected] (James K. Campbell), [email protected] (Michael Martin Nieto). 1 Present address: Global Aerospace Corporation, 711 W.
    [Show full text]
  • Hilda Collisional Family Affected by Planetary Migration?
    Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 000, 1–13 (2010) Printed 25 October 2010 (MN LATEX style file v2.2) Hilda collisional family affected by planetary migration? M. Broˇz1⋆, D. Vokrouhlick´y1, A. Morbidelli2, W.F. Bottke3, D. Nesvorn´y3 1Institute of Astronomy, Charles University, Prague, V Holeˇsoviˇck´ach 2, 18000 Prague 8, Czech Republic 2Observatoire de la Cte d’Azur, BP 4229, 06304 Nice Cedex 4, France 3Department of Space Studies, Southwest Research Institute, 1050 Walnut St., Suite 300, Boulder, CO 80302, USA Accepted ???. Received ???; in original form ??? ABSTRACT We model a long-term evolution of the Hilda collisional family located in the 3/2 mean-motion resonance with Jupiter. It might be driven by planetary migration and later on by the Yarkovsky/YORP effect. Assuming that: (i) impact disruption was isotropic, and (ii) albedo distribution of small asteroids is the same as for large ones, we need at least a slight perturbation by planetary migration to explain the current large spread of the family in eccentricity. Hilda is thus the first family in the Main Belt, which may serve as a direct test of planetary migration. We tested a number of scenarios for the evolution of planetary orbits. We select those which perturb the Hilda family sufficiently (by secondary resonances) and, on the other hand, do not destroy the Hilda family completely. There is a preference for fast migration time scales ≃ 0.3 Myr to 30 Myr at most and an indication, that Jupiter and Saturn were not in a compact configuration (PJ/PS > 2.09) at the time when the Hilda family had been created.
    [Show full text]
  • Constraining the Formation of the Four Terrestrial Planets in the Solar System
    Constraining the Formation of the Four Terrestrial Planets in the Solar System Patryk Sofia Lykawka1 and Takashi Ito (ఀ⸨Ꮥኈ)2 1 School of Interdisciplinary Social and Human Sciences, Kindai University, Shinkamikosaka 228-3, Higashiosaka, Osaka, 577-0813, Japan; [email protected] 2 National Astronomical Observatory of Japan, Osawa 2-21-1, Mitaka, Tokyo, 181-8588, Japan ABSTRACT To reproduce the orbits and masses of the terrestrial planets (analogs) of the solar system, most studies scrutinize simulations for success as a batch. However, there is insufficient discussion in the literature on the likelihood of forming planet analogs simultaneously in the same system (analog system). To address this issue, we performed 540 N-body simulations of protoplanetary disks representative of typical models in the literature. We identified a total of 194 analog systems containing at least three analogs, but only 17 systems simultaneously contained analogs of the four terrestrial planets. From an analysis of our analog systems, we found that, compared to the real planets, truncated disks based on typical outcomes of the Grand Tack model produced analogs of Mercury and Mars that were too dynamically cold and located too close to the Venus and Earth analogs. Additionally, all the Mercury analogs were too massive, while most of the Mars analogs were more massive than Mars. Furthermore, the timing of the Moon-forming impact was too early in these systems, and the amount of additional mass accreted after the event was too great. Therefore, such truncated disks cannot explain the formation of the terrestrial planets. Our results suggest that forming the four terrestrial planets requires disks with the following properties: 1) Mass concentrated in narrow core regions between ~0.7–0.9 and ~1.0–1.2 au; 2) an inner region component starting at ~0.3–0.4 au; 3) a less massive component beginning at ~1.0–1.2 au; 4) embryos rather than planetesimals carrying most of the disk mass; and 5) Jupiter and Saturn placed on eccentric orbits.
    [Show full text]
  • Earth and Terrestrial Planet Formation
    Earth and Terrestrial Planet Formation Seth A. Jacobson∗1,2 and Kevin J. Walsh3 1Bayerisches Geoinstitut, Universtät Bayreuth, 95440 Bayreuth, Germany 2Laboratoire Lagrange, Observatoire de la Côte d’Azur, 06304 Nice, France 3Planetary Science Directorate, Southwest Research Institute, 80302 Boulder, CO, USA Abstract The growth and composition of Earth is a direct consequence of planet formation throughout the Solar System. We discuss the known history of the Solar System, the proposed stages of growth and how the early stages of planet formation may be dominated by pebble growth processes. Pebbles are small bodies whose strong interactions with the nebula gas lead to remarkable new accretion mechanisms for the formation of planetesimals and the growth of planetary embryos. Many of the popular models for the later stages of planet formation are presented. The classical models with the giant planets on fixed orbits are not consistent with the known history of the Solar System, fail to create a high Earth/Mars mass ratio, and, in many cases, are also internally inconsistent. The successful Grand Tack model creates a small Mars, a wet Earth, a realistic asteroid belt and the mass-orbit structure of the terrestrial planets. In the Grand Tack scenario, growth curves for Earth most closely match a Weibull model. The feeding zones, which determine the compositions of Earth and Venus follow a particular pattern determined by Jupiter, while the feeding zones of Mars and Theia, the last giant impactor on Earth, appear to randomly sample the terrestrial disk. The late accreted mass samples the disk nearly evenly. 1 Introduction The formation and history of Earth cannot be studied in isolation.
    [Show full text]
  • Arxiv:1110.5042V2
    On the Migration of Jupiter and Saturn: Constraints from Linear Models of Secular Resonant Coupling with the Terrestrial Planets Craig B. Agnor1 and D. N. C. Lin2,3 1Astronomy Unit, School of Physics & Astronomy, Queen Mary University of London, UK; [email protected] 2Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics, University of California Santa Cruz, CA, USA 3Kavli Institute of Astronomy and Astrophysics & College of Physics, Peking University, Beijing, China ABSTRACT We examine how the late divergent migration of Jupiter and Saturn may have per- turbed the terrestrial planets. Using a modified secular model we have identified six secular resonances between the ν5 frequency of Jupiter and Saturn and the four apsidal eigenfrequencies of the terrestrial planets (g1–4). We derive analytic upper limits on the eccentricity and orbital migration timescale of Jupiter and Saturn when these reso- nances were encountered to avoid perturbing the eccentricities of the terrestrial planets to values larger than the observed ones. Because of the small amplitudes of the j = 2, 3 terrestrial eigenmodes the g2 − ν5 and g3 − ν5 resonances provide the strongest con- straints on giant planet migration. If Jupiter and Saturn migrated with eccentricities comparable to their present day values, smooth migration with exponential timescales characteristic of planetesimal-driven migration (τ ∼ 5–10Myr) would have perturbed the eccentricities of the terrestrial planets to values greatly exceeding the observed ones. This excitation may be mitigated if the eccentricity of Jupiter was small during the mi- gration epoch, migration was very rapid (e.g., τ . 0.5Myr perhaps via planet–planet scattering or instability-driven migration) or the observed small eccentricity amplitudes of the j = 2, 3 terrestrial modes result from low probability cancellation of several large amplitude contributions.
    [Show full text]